About your Search

20130211
20130219
STATION
MSNBC 7
MSNBCW 7
CSPAN 5
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 28
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)
. they came up with instead a very, very weak answer. harry reid caved into the republicans on this, i hate to say it. sol many democrats were saying this is going to be fine because now, we all agree that you need 60. we didn't get rid of it. they can use it. they don't have to come to the floor and talk at that talk, but it's going to work. it's going to work because republicans have greedp agreed they will filibuster for stuff that's really important. when harry reid and mitch mcconnell agree this is really worth it. damn if, we said at the time this was phony, it was not going to work, it was not going to make any change. republicans were going to abuse it. they would never abide by that agreement. two weeks ago. republicans trotted it out yesterday, put a filibuster on the nomination of chuck hagel to be our next secretary of defense, and they won. you need 60 votes to get over it. and the most they could get with the democrats and four republicans was 58 votes t he lost by one vote. harry reid ended up having to vote no. that way, by voting know he
seems to be signaling that they're not going to fight hard. >> a win right now given that harry reid, the democratic reid democratic leader in the senate is not going along. a vote would be a political victory in a town that doesn't want to do this. the president is being pragmatic and he's not going as far as progressives would like, but if you can get the votes it's more progress than people think he can get right now. >> john: and in fairness to the president, what toes mean that we're going to win an assaults weapon. the president will win even by losing. harry reid almost lost his job to someone wearing a tinfoil hat hat. so i think that harry reid is going to let this die but that's how the president wins. if the president fights a battle that he knows he's doomed to fail god for bid there is a massacre or the next ten massacres he can point his finger right to the people who killed this bill and say you own this. that would be a political win for this president at a bloody cost. >> cenk: your analysis is right. but if he wanted a legislative and policy victory, of course, wha
. it was just a month ago that harry reid backed off the idea of filibuster reform. do you think going through this may change his thinking a little bit? >> i don't know. what i do know is this, i know chuck hagel very well, i like him a lot. he was a democrat, he was a republican in the senate. he is clearly well qualified to be secretary of defense. he did have a day that i'm sure could have been better when he was before the committee, but they were pretty merciless the way they went after him on several subjects. >> whatever harry reid's going to do, what about somebody who's served in the chamber and is watching this right now, do you think filibuster should be on the table flight? >> the fill buggser reform that i would support is simply getting rid of the filibuster most on the motion to proceed. the filibuster issue, it's not because of the rules, it's because of the people who have come to the senate recently, who said, you know, what i'm going to do is i'm going to throw the wrench in the crank case here and just stop everything in its cracks, we have got people who think their best
and brennan. harry reid said he's not going to recognize the hold. i think it has to be worked out behind closed doors on capitol hill. my understanding is they're hoping for a hagel vote tomorrow. i know brennan has the votes on the floor to win. it is a question of when it comes up for a vote. >> bill: senator feinstein announcing yesterday or this morning that she is scheduling a vote on john brennan in the senate intelligence committee but not until they come back. they're out next week. for whatever reason, right? valentine's day. i don't know. that's presidents' day week, of course. the week after that, when they come back that she will -- she'll schedule a vote. and then tomorrow, the president is going to -- >> chicago. >> bill: and then to florida too, i believe. >> he's taking a little presidents' day get away in florida over the weekend. before then, he's going to chicago. the topic there is what he calls the ladders the middle class the various programs to help get people jobs and better-paying jobs but i think he will also make a big pitch for his gun violence package in chic
of questions about whether democratic legislators up to and including harry reid would support what the president wants to do when t comes to gun control. >> that is a good question, jon. in the political calculus that is pretty simple. you have democrats that could be embarrassed if forced take a vote on guns. like assault weapons ban, et cetera. those are in conservative states or in the house in conservative districts may have been carried by mitt romney and they're holding on by a thread. we're talking about whether or not senate majority leader harry reid is willing to put those democrats at risk and also then put at risk control of the senate because republicans have fewer people who were running, who will be running in 14 and fewer people who are at risk. though again, the dynamic is very difficult for the democrats and here's a vote that would expose them to great political costs. jon: let's take, let's take another listen at one of the things the president said last night. >> and i know you want these job-creating projects in your district. i've seen all those ribbon cuttin
, and the reason why it was 58 votes is because harry reid switched his vote to no soap the senate can bring it back up again. you have a lot of republican senators who were saying last week that they did not want to see it go up in filibuster. at least it would be an up-down of the to be approved. there was no precedent to filibuster a choice like this. and the republicans decided they wanted to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the terrorist attack in benghazi in september, and so they are committed to passing a goal when they come back. the way you are looking at it, it is a tedious exercise in delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed. he will just have to wait 11 days. you should confirm him because you are going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. host: harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do
republicans passed so many things that just never see the light of day. and harry reid's senate. but the way things used to work, you used to pass things in the house, and then the senate would pass things. and then when harold and i at least were in washington in the '90s, then you go to conference committee, and they battle it out. that doesn't happen if harry reid doesn't pass things in the senate. he is the president's pocket veto. >> the step you're missing in that is -- and kevin mccarthy's interview proves that denial is not simply a river in egypt -- there's no conference committee. >> can i -- hold on. hold on. >> that's a good one. that was so fancy. >> is not just a river in egypt. >> that's what he does now. >> that's something brad pitt would say in one of those chanel ads. >> let's call brad. >> standing against the wall wearing nothing. >> he's wearing the sweater. >> go like this. >> you can't get away with saying things like that on this show. >> i want to hear his vision. >> why? more "morning joe." >> i know you're way above the cliche. i'm sorry. >> stupid cliche. >> what
congressional leaders from both houses and both parties. so that's mitch mcconnell, harry reid, nancy pelosi and john boehner. in response i think to the number of democrats and the first lady bringing victims of gun violence with them as guests to the state of the union this year, to highlight that issue, one republican member of congress this year has decided to do his part to advance the serious consideration of gun violence and lawful gun ownership in america by inviting as his guest for the state of the union this gentleman. >> hey obama, you might want to suck on one of these, you punk! obama, he's a piece of [ bleep ] and i told him to suck on my machine gun. let's hear it for him. i said hey, humor me. you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless [ bleep ]. >> mr. ted nugent is a musician. i believe he is still mostly known for "cat scratch fever", but i could be wrong. he was investigated by the secret service last year after telling an nra convention in april of 2012, quote, if barack obama is elected, i'll either be dead or in jail this time next year." texas
republicans. it's also about the senate democrats, so this is going to have a lot to do i think with harry reid and with those in the senate who can figure out the art of the doable which is really what politics is about. what can we get that will at once move the president's agenda forward and still protect those who might be vulnerable, vulnerable democrats, in 2014. >> all righty. candy crowley, thank you so much. candy, good to see you this morning. stay tuned for "state of the union" with candy crowley, of course, starting at the top of the hour, 9:00 a.m. eastern, 6:00 a.m. pacific right here on cnn. >>> all right. flipping the switch here. what is this viral video called harlem shake? i didn't know until a while ago. why it's making millions of people, even fellow cnners, dance like crazy. ♪ see life in the best light. outdoors, or in. transitions® lenses automatically filter just the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it's meant to be seen. maybe even a little better. visit your eyecare professional today to ask about our newest lenses, transitions vantage and
house and harry reid in the senate have look at this issue of something that's going to be almost impossible. i don't know harry reid can get an assault weapons ban. i don't know there is enough in his conference to get it over the floor. everybody involved in this sees a potentially defining moments for 2014 so where you can say if you have these votes, this guy voted against it or his party voted against it. >> your point, at least get them on the record. right? i want to ask you related, by the way, your calls welcome here on the stayed of the union, which parts you thought were particularly strong what struck you of where he scored or maybe what he failed to mention. violence against women act not to get lost. we talked about it passed the senate overwhelming vote. >> every woman in the senate voted for it. every republican woman in the senate voted for it. >> bill: 22 republicans in the senate joined democrats to vote for that bill. now, will it get a vote in the house? >> it has to get a vote in the house. the republicans are trying to remak
reid yesterday filed a motion to limit debate and force vote on the hagel nomination. harry reid said today, though, that republicans are mounting a full-scale filibuster of the hagel nomination. he said that there's never been a filibuster of a secretary of defense in the country's history. discussion on the nomination continues. senator leahy on the senate floor now and that is live on c-span2. also coming up live on booktv.org later today at 7:00 p.m. eastern, stephen hess who wrote "whatever happened to the washington reporters: 1978-2012." he interviewed journalist who is were covered the federal government and washington and 30 years later talked to 283 of those to find out where things went on in their career and the fields they covered. that discussion with stephen hess gets under way at 7:00 and that's at booktv.org. >> we have a habit in this country, if i may say, now of glossing over presidents. we decided, some people, that they're balancedying -- bald eagles and they have to be treated as symbols of the country. what that means, though, is you have -- you have a smoothin
. the reason why it was defeated because the majority leader harry reid switched his vote to no so he could bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recease. a lot of republican senators were saying that they did not want this choice filibustered. even if they wanted to vote no on his nomination he at least deserves an up down vote in order to be approved. the republicans decided to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the attack in benghazi so they passed hagel when they come back. the way you're looking at it, to me, it is efforts to delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed as the secretary of defense. he just has to wait a couple of days. you're going to confirm himny way and it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to to do. host: harry reid set a new vote in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: well, they say they would like answers, again, from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do in the terrorist attack in libya. the white
for the institution. >> it is pretty clear that harry reid and the senate majority leader -- the leader in the senate wants to push this vote. the president wants it. we're going to be without a secretary of defense if we don't do this. leon panetta retired. i think it will go through. thursday is my guess. >> bill: all right. we've got nuclear with a nuclear test. president obama speaking about a reduction of our nuclear arsenal. nuclear arsenal tonight. and chuck hagel up for a vote today. we didn't even get to drones yet. we have a little more time here with joe cirincione. time for your calls at 1-866-55-press. on this special mardi gras state of the union edition of the "full court press." >> announcer: heard around the country and seen on current tv. this is the "bill press show." people with sore throats have something new to say. ahh ! mmm ! people with sore throats have something new to say. ahh ! mmm ! ahh ! finally, there's cepacol sensations. serious sore throat medicine seriously great taste. plus the medicine lasts long after the lozenge is gone. ahh ! mmm ! cepacol sensations.
case to see if they can use the public pressure, west virginia and harry reid in nevada to do things they might not otherwise want to do. i'm extremely skeptical. people have tried this in the past. no doubt the obama folks have a better organization and social media gives you advantages you didn't have in the past but they're trying to do something i have not seen signs they are willing to do in a non-presidential election. >> i do think, michael steele, the republicans will see the president talk on guns tonight and see the victims of newtown. i think that's going to cut through. we've all had these moments and said the union addresses ab had these moments and maybe there won't be an assault weapon ban and maybe won't go after thes a 99 high capacity magazines. but republicans will have a hard time saying no to background checks and saying no to gun trafficking laws. if they do say no to these items that are 9010s, we used to go around the hill saying it's 8020, 80-20 negative. if it's 80-20, that train's coming an you get out of the way. this is 90-10. my question is will republic
and will cause .eat harm the president takes it. speaker boehner he said. majority leader harry reid hates it. they created it. imagine how the rest of us feel about it. somehow our leaders cannot seem to figure a way out of its. we all agree the country needs to find a more sustainable fiscal path. in my view, we need a balanced thatach, as wels said, includes both spending and revenues. cuts in spending should focus on programs of a growing the most, not on discretionary spending, which is not growing, is not the problem, and yet has already borne the brunt of cuts. the discretionary spending is a part of the budget where america's future lies. include such investment as research and education. cutting investment in our future is not the way to solve this problem. yet that is exactly what the sequester will do. there is a better way. we have talked about the impact of the sequester on an economy that is still recovering. i want to focus on the longer term, the economy and the nation that we will leave to our children, our grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. the research being cut but th
. the president hates it. speaker boehner hates it. majority leader harry reid hates it. and they created it. imagine how the rest of us feel about it. yet, somehow our leaders can't seem to figure a way out of it. we all agree that country needs to find a more sustainable fiscal path. in my view we need to balanced approach. as wes said a few minutes ago, that includes both spending and revenue. cuts in spending should focus on programs that are growing the most. not on discretionary spending, which is not growing. it's not the problem and yet has already borne the brunt of cuts. discretion spending is a part of the budget where america's future lies. it includes such investment as research and education. cutting investment in our future is not the way to solve this problem. yet, that's exactly what the sequestered will do. there's a better way. we've talked quite a bit here today about the impact of the sequestered on an economy that is still recovering. i want to focus on the longer-term, the economy and the nation that we will lead to her children, our grandchildren, and great-grandchild
and need more time. it was harry reid who called this vote as sort of an attempt to call their bluff saying this is enough, you're delaying this for no reason but i don't think this is going to help the republicans' image especially when they're going around saying we're not actually trying to stop this nomination. we're not actually filibustering, so what are they doing? i think especially for people who are sick of the sort of washington games, this isn't a good image for them. >> jake, let's talk about this break that congress is on. house speaker nancy pelosi blamed republicans for not using this time more productively. take a listen. >> they manufactured the crisis and instead of having us try to avert that crisis they go on a nine-day recess. why? ? why? people outside the congress are saying no deal, no break. >> why, jake, why? >> nancy pelosi did similar things when she had control but that simplifies a complicated issue. democrats and republicans and the president are miles apart when it comes to averting the sequester. democrats want to raise taxes. republicans say they don't wan
and approve the senate nomination, harry reid said he'd like a full senate vote either wednesday or thursday. the armed services committee met this morning to look at the upcoming sequester. those automatic defense cuts set to happen march 1. and they heard from among others the chairman or the joint chiefs of the -- the chief of staff of the army, general ray odierno. >> the fiscal outlook, which the army faces in fiscal year threen and to my hodge -- 2013 and to my knowledge is dire and unprecedented. by the budget control act of 2011, the combination of the continuing resolution, a shortfall -- excuse me -- the -- a shortfall in overseas contingency operation funds for afghanistan and the sequester in fiscal year 2013 has resulted in a $17 billion to $18 billion shortfall to the army's operation and maintenance accounts. as well as an additional $6 billion cut to other programs. all of this will come in the remaining seven months of this year. the fiscal year 2013 fiscal situation will have grave and immediate readiness impacts by all forces not serving in afghanistan or forward in korea.
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)